harrypotterfandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:Officer
For some or for all? I will be the first to admit that I acted a bit immature when I edited the Officer page. It was one of those "in the heat of the moment" kind of things while frustrated, but now that I've thought about it, I can't help but feel that the reasoning for undoing my edit on it was a bit hypocritical. If it is indeed the case that the word Officer applies to only some members of the Magical Law Enforcement Squad and not all because it "it corresponds to what we actually know", then how come I am meeting such opposition when I do exactly the same thing? Why is it that when I present contextual evidence, it is treated like inconclusive conjecture, but when you do it, then it is a-okey? When you say it corresponds to current information that only some are officers and not all - I'm sorry, but I fail to see the rhyme and the reason behind that conclusion. I'm not necessarily looking to make some BIG debate/discussion like I did on that other page, but this is something I need to understand before I can leave it be. In what way does it correspond? We have one person thus far in the wizarding world of Harry Potter who is referred to as an officer. In most countries, including the United Kingdom, I am fairly certain, the most common usage of the word in relating to law enforcement is that of a generic term for policemen- and women of different ranks. Langarm even uses it in a way that makes it seem like a generic use: "I am a Magical Law Enforcement Officer!". If "Officer" was a title specific to him, a rank that implied some sort of seniority and/or supervisory duties, then why wouldn't he said that he was an "Officer in/of the Magical Law Enforcement Squad!" instead? Isn't it more ''speculative to assume officer is some sort of rank or title that applies only to some members have, as opposed to the more commonplace use for it unless otherwise is implied wtihin the game itself? We now know that: *Curse-Breakers works for the Ministry of Magic. *We know that their livelihood consist of removing dark charms from areas and/or objects. *We know there is an office in the Ministry specifically tasked with the very same job. In what way does these three ''not correspond? And how does "officer" and "some but not all" correspon than "all Hit Wizards are officers but not all officers are Hit Wizards?" We also know that: *We know Muggle-baiting is too trivial for Aurors, who fight against Dark Wizards. *Cerberus Langarm is trained to fight Dark Wizards, but is not an Auror. *But Hit Wizards and Witches also are called upon to fight Dark Wizards. In what way does these three not correspond? I did exactly the same as you: I looked at the evidence, and the implications, but instead of intepreting, I simply recorded my findings. How was what I did any different from how you reached your conclusion about officers? Ninclow (talk) 01:08, February 13, 2018 (UTC) :Saying "at least some members use the title of Officer" is not at all equivalent to either saying "some members" (which means not all members use the title) or saying "all members" -- the semantic nuance is that "at least some" means we don't know exactly and that it could be either possibility. It is not conjecture, in fact, is pretty much the least conjectural word choice possible. :As for your argument about the other discussion, in this article I did not make any inference whatsover; the deliberately vague choice of words leaves all possibilities on the table. -- [[User:Seth Cooper| Seth Cooper ]][[User talk:Seth Cooper| owl post!]] 01:54, February 13, 2018 (UTC) : :Huh... My bad, then. ^^' Ninclow (talk) 02:28, February 13, 2018 (UTC) Behind the scenes "officer" mention Okay, I'll admit that the reason I put for undoing your edit was kind of hollow. The actual reason, or the one when I had in mind when I wrote what I wrote, that is, is that "officer" is not a UK Police rank, and can therefore appropiately be used when addressing a ploliceman/policewoman. As for "Officer Langarm", that seems more like a sort of "literary device" for the benefit of the player. The Fantastic Beasts: Cases From the Wizarding World is, after all, when it comes down to it, mainly a story framed in game mechanics. "Officer" seems like it is supposed to tell us, the players, where Langarm comes from. Had he just been "Cerberus Langarm, of the Department of Magical Law Enfocement", he could be working anywhere, and it wouldn't have made any sense, since we wouldn't know of any MLE division tasked with liaising with other departments. By giving us this hint of which division Langarm comes from, it helps us understand the story better, and the MLE would concievably be the obvious choice for such a task, and for obvious reasons. So - when we see "Officer Langarm" on the screen, it don't necessarily mean officer can't, won't or isn't used as a generic term within the wizarding community of Great Britain, only that it wasn't used as such in the context of this particular story. Not thus far, at least. Ninclow (talk) 04:00, February 22, 2018 (UTC) :Point being? -- [[User:Seth Cooper| Seth Cooper ]][[User talk:Seth Cooper| owl post!]] 04:04, February 22, 2018 (UTC) Point being that the fact that "officer aren't used as a generic term within the narritive of the game" isn't a valid argument for removing the denotion that it most likely is, regardless of how its used. Or shall I start removing every piece of "speculative" information from all pages with a BTS, section? Shall I remove the theorized mechanics of the Unforgivable Curses because they aren't confirmed to be true? Shall I remove any mention of Hogwarts from the pages of Kingsley and Scrimgeour just in case they were home schooled and achieved the recquired results for Auror training without passing O.W.L.S. and N.E.W.T.S. the "regular way"? You made no issue of it when I presented the most likely scenario of how Yaxley succeeded in placing the Imperius Curse on Thicknesse on the BTS there, why all of a sudden make an issue where none exist? It was added in the BTS of Melody Barebones that she most likely where sent to an orphanage after the death of her foster mother and sister. And you called it "speculation". So what? The BTS section of two thirds of all the pages of a certain significance to the HP universe on the whole wikia have been used to denote likely explonations on plotholes and to fill holes in our base of knowledge in the absence of actual facts with educated guesses. I added the known fact that Norwegian fans, at least some, calls one of the talking stone statutes in the fifth game Pumba because it has the same voice actor and looks like a warthog, that wasn't a problem. In Norwegian, the "Golden Snitch" is called "Gullsnopp", which the Swedish finds hailarious because in Swedish, "snopp" is a word used to refer to a male human being's private parts. If I added that bit of trivia to the BTS section, would that be an issue, really? Ninclow (talk) 04:24, February 22, 2018 (UTC) ::"Behind the scenes" sections are mostly places for trivia that won't fit elsewhere and, yes, educated guesses. Educated guesses are not, by definition, interpretations which disregard or in some way fly in the face of canonical fact (such as, case in point, the fact that "Officer" is capitalised and used in the same way as a rank title in , as an honorific, not as a generic common noun). Dismissing this for no apparent reason is unreasonable. ::(As for your comment about your addition to the BTS section of the Yaxley article, the fact that I did not change something does not mean I endorse it or find it to be correct; odds are -- and in that case the odds are very good indeed -- I just hadn't read any of it). -- [[User:Seth Cooper| Seth Cooper ]][[User talk:Seth Cooper| owl post!]] 04:47, February 22, 2018 (UTC) Well, by your own admission, since the BTS's are trivia and educated guesses that fit elsewhere, and the Yaxley example does not 'disregard or in some way fly in the face of canonical fact' by any stretch of the imagination, so if you decide to remove it, I'm afraid I won't have amy chance but to undo such a counterproductive edit. Also, it don't neither your endorsementto be warranting a mention. Not if it don't "disregard canonical fact" Also, I just told you my reasoning was because, and I quote: "seems more like a sort of "literary device" for the benefit of the player. The Fantastic Beasts: Cases From the Wizarding World is, after all, when it comes down to it, mainly a story framed in game mechanics. "Officer" seems like it is supposed to tell us, the players, where Langarm comes from. Had he just been "Cerberus Langarm, of the Department of Magical Law Enfocement", he could be working anywhere, and it wouldn't have made any sense, since we wouldn't know of any MLE division tasked with liaising with other departments. By giving us this hint of which division Langarm comes from, it helps us understand the story better, and the MLE would concievably be the obvious choice for such a task, and for obvious reasons. So - when we see "Officer Langarm" on the screen, it don't necessarily mean officer can't, won't or isn't used as a generic term within the wizarding community of Great Britain, only that it wasn't used as such in the context of this particular story. Not thus far, at least." That isn't my definition of "no apparent reason" Ninclow (talk) 05:15, February 22, 2018 (UTC) :So you are disregarding something as a "literary device" (as if that was in any way a reason to disregard it in the first place) just because it happens to fit better with a theory you happen to have? Granted, that is not "no apparent reason", is a reason that just won't do at all -- it reeks of a no true Scotsman. (Won't discuss changes to the Corban Yaxley article here, it's not the proper place). -- [[User:Seth Cooper| Seth Cooper ]][[User talk:Seth Cooper| owl post!]] 18:38, February 22, 2018 (UTC)